NORTH AMERICAN UNION

The North American Union (NAU) is an economic union, in some instances also a political union, of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The concept is loosely based on the European Union, occasionally including a common currency called the Amero or the North American Dollar.

While the idea for some form of union has been discussed or proposed in academic, business and political circles for many decades, government officials from all three nations say there are no plans to create such a union and no agreement to do so has been signed. The formation of a North American Union has been the subject of various conspiracy theories.

Since at least the mid-19th century, numerous concepts for a union among Canada, Mexico and the United States, some including Caribbean, Central American and South American countries, have been proposed, such as the North American Technate. In 2003, amid a push for greater integration and concerns in the fallout of the September 11 attacks about the impact of heightened security on trade relations, an effort organized by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, and the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations called the Independent Task Force on North America was initiated. Several weeks before a meeting of North American leaders on March 23, 2005 the Task Force issued a press release and a statement from the Task Force’s chairmen calling for deeper integration of NAFTA to form a North American Economic and Security Community by 2010.

The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) was formed at the meeting of North American leaders. It was described by the leaders of Canada, Mexico and the United States as a dialogue to provide greater cooperation on security and economic issues.In response to later concerns, a section was put up on the initiative’s site clarifying the SPP was not a legal agreement, that the initiative “does not seek to rewrite or renegotiate NAFTA”, and that the partnership itself “creates no NAFTA-plus legal status.” A number of academics and government officials at the time viewed the SPP as moving North America towards greater integration.

The Task Force published a report in May 2005 which praised the SPP initiative and pushed for greater economic integration by 2010. They repeated their call for the “establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community, the boundaries of which would be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter.” In the report the Task Force said that a North American Community, which would be similar to the European Community which preceded the EU, should not rely on “grand schemes of confederation or union” and did not suggest a supranational government or a common currency. The Task Force’s recommendations included developing a North American customs union, common market, investment fund, energy strategy, set of regulatory standards, security perimeter, border pass, and advisory council, among other common goals.

Former Mexican president Vicente Fox is the only leader involved in the SPP process who has expressed a desire for a North American Union-style body. He noted the success countries like Ireland and Spain had in modernizing their economies and bringing higher standards of living for their citizens by joining what is now the European Union and expressed the hope that Mexico could have a similar experience in a trade body of comparable scope in North America. Fox has, however, expressed frustration with the lack of progress on measures such as immigration reform, which proved to be contentious within the United States.

In 2005, claims emerged from critics of North American integration that a “North American Union” was not only being planned, but was being implemented by the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. These critics cited the formation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and claimed it was an attempt to dramatically alter the economic and political status quo between the countries outside of the scrutiny of the respective national legislatures, a critique heightened by the subsequent publication of the Independent Task Force on North America report which praised the SPP initiative and called for greater economic integration by 2010.

Allegations of a Plan or Blueprint under Bush

The “plan to create” a North American Union as a regional government—comprising a collective government for the United States, Canada, and Mexico—is “directly stated only” in the May 2005 task force report Building a North American Community published by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Jerome Corsi wrote June 26, 2006.

The “blueprint” which President George W. Bush is following to create a North American Union was “laid out” in the May 2005 report, Corsi wrote May 19, 2006. “The CFR report connects the dots between the Bush administration’s actual policy on illegal immigration and the drive to create the North American Union.” Proof of the hidden creation of the North American Union was further proved by a leak from WikiLeaks Exposing the North American Integration Plot.

Bush is “pursuing a globalist agenda to create a North American Union, effectively erasing our borders with both Mexico and Canada,” which, Corsi wrote, is “the hidden agenda behind the Bush administration’s true open borders policy.”

The plan, Corsi wrote, is “contained” in the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, “little noticed” by the mainstream media when President Bush, Mexico’s President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin “created it” March 23, 2005, in a summit held at Waco, Texas.

A North American Union is being created “through a process of governmental regulations” and without ever “having to bring the issue before the American people for a clear referendum or vote,” Corsi wrote May 24, 2006.

Partnership for Prosperity

“In September of 2001, during President Bush’s first state visit, President Bush and President Fox launched the Partnership for Prosperity, a private-public alliance to harness the power of the private sector to foster an environment in which no Mexican feels compelled to leave his home for lack of jobs or opportunity.“—Office of NAFTA and Inter-American Affairs

SPP Working Groups

“Canada has established an SPP working group within their Foreign Affairs department,” Corsi reported May 30, 2006. “Mexico has placed the SPP within the office of the Secretaria de Economia and created an extensive website for the Alianza Para La Securidad y La Prosperidad de Améica del Norte (ASPAN). On this Mexican website, ASPAN is described as ‘a permanent, tri-lateral process to create a major integration of North America.'”

NAFTA Super-Highways

“What is objectionable is the plan to form a European Union-style North American Super-Highway system whose primary goal is to establish trilateral links for the open passage of freight transportation and the virtually unrestrained ‘migration’ of people among the three countries. Building NAFTA Super-Highways that effectively erase the U.S. borders with Mexico and Canada is a concern, especially if the NAFTA Super-Highways contribute to accomplishing in a de facto manner the integration of the United States into a North American Union, thereby threatening the currently established sovereignty of the United States,” Corsi wrote June 30, 2006.

Permanent Tribunal

“The CFR plan clearly calls for the establishment of a ‘permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution’ as part of the new regional North American Union (NAU) governmental structure that is proposed to go into place in 2010,” Corsi wrote June 19, 2006. This tribunal would “trump” the U.S. Supreme Court.

Biometric Border Pass

“Instead of stopping North Americans on the borders, we ought to provide them with a secure, biometric Border Pass that would ease transit across the border like an E-Z pass permits our cars to speed through toll booths,” Robert A. Pastor told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, June 9, 2005.

North American Emergency Management

North American Emergency Management (NAEM) is one of the priority initiatives set forth in the March 31, 2006, White House news release and the fact sheet posted on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America website.

The function of NAEM would be similar to that of FEMA’s operations during Hurricane Katrina. In his September 20, 2005, article “Glimpse Into The Future Of Global Collectivism – FEMA: Katrina,” Chris Gupta wrote:

“The primary job of the military, FEMA, and Homeland Security is not to protect the American people in times of emergency but to protect the government in times of emergency and keep it functioning. Their primary assignment is, not to rescue people, but to control them. Their directive is to relocate families and businesses, confiscate property, commandeer goods, direct labor and services, and establish martial law. The reason FEMA and Homeland security failed to carry out an effective rescue operation [for Hurricane Katrina] is that this was not their primary mission, and the reason they blocked others from doing so is that any operations not controlled by the central authority are contrary to their directives. Their objective was to bring the entire area under the control of the federal government – and this they succeeded in doing very well. They did not fail in New Orleans. They were a huge success. Once this simple fact is understood, everything that happened in the wake of Katrina becomes understandable and logical.

“If there are new terrorist attacks against the United States or Great Britain (or any other country), what we witnessed in New Orleans may have been a glimpse into the future of global collectivism.”

Bilateral and Trilateral Partnerships and Agreements

U.S. Legislation & Executive Orders

Executive Order: “Commission for Environmental Cooperation, Commission for Labor Cooperation, Border Environment Cooperation Commission, and North American Development Bank,” White House, March 16, 1994. Signed by President Bill Clinton

Aviation and Transportation Safety Act of 2001 (S.1447) became Public Law 107-71 on November 19, 2001.

Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 (H.R.3525): “To enhance the border security of the United States, and for other purposes,” introduced December 19, 2001, in the U.S. House of Representatives by Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-WI) and became Public Law No: 107-173, April 18, 2002.
North American Cooperative Security Act (S. 853) introduced April 20, 2005, (109th Congress) in the U.S. Senate by Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana): “A bill to direct the Secretary of State to establish a program to bolster the mutual security and safety of the United States, Canada, and Mexico, and for other purposes.” The bill was read twice and referred to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

North American Cooperative Security Act (H.R. 2672) introduced May 26, 2005, (109th Congress) in the U.S. House of Representatives by Representative Katherine Harris (R-Florida): “To direct the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a program to enhance the mutual security and safety of the United States, Canada, and Mexico, and for other purposes.” The bill was referred to the House Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment on June 6, 2005.

Executive Order: “Protecting the Property Rights of the American People,” White House, June 23, 2006. Signed by President George W. Bush

S. 3633 Protection against United Nations Taxation Act of 2006 introduced July 11, 2006, (109th Congress) in the U.S. Senate by Senator James Inhofe, et al. The legislation would “require the withholding of United States contributions to the United Nations until the President certifies that the United Nations is not engaged in global taxation schemes.” The bill was read twice and referred to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

DISCLAIMER

DISCLAIMER
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The myriad of facts, conjecture, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information in the articles, stories and commentaries posted on this site range from cutting edge hard news and comment to extreme and unusual perspectives. We choose not to sweep uncomfortable material under the rug - where it can grow and fester. We choose not to censor skewed logic and uncomfortable rhetoric. These things reflect the world as it now is - for better and worse. We present multiple facts, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information. As with all controversies, we stand ready to post any and all rebuttals and responses from people mentioned in the material we post.
FOR MORE INFORMATION REVIEW DISCLAIMER UNDER THE CONTACT SECTION, OR, SELECT THE LINK BELOWFull Disclaimer